Can someone with a Foxbody Mustang answer my question?

"TurboSloth" (TheTurboSloth) 01/16/2014 at 12:08 • Filed to: None

2

39

I was looking for a foxbody for a project car, but was wondering what the difference between the LX and GT trim was (87'-93'). Which one comes with the 5.0 and which one comes with the 4 cyl (it is a 4cyl right?)

pdthedeuce > TurboSloth 01/16/2014 at 12:11

0

all GTs had v8s , some LXs have v8s . the LX was a lower trim level and generally considered a lighter car than the GT .

Casper > TurboSloth 01/16/2014 at 12:11

0

http://mustangforums.com/forum/5-0l-gen…

Nibbles > TurboSloth 01/16/2014 at 12:12

0

LX is lighter (I believe) and can be had with the 5.0. Also any example with a "GT" badge has most likely been abused; possibly less so if you get the LX.

CalzoneGolem > TurboSloth 01/16/2014 at 12:12

2

The first step with a project Foxbody is to take the motor out and throw it away.

Paul, Man of Mustangs > TurboSloth 01/16/2014 at 12:15

0

Both the LX and GT come with 5.0s. The LX I believe is also available with the 2.3 and the V6 (3.8, I think). If you're looking for speed, go with the LX notchback. It's considerably lighter than the GT, has the same motor, and is faster to start with. The notchback design also has better chassis strength. If you like the GT's styling, then go for that. The GT may have revised suspension tuning, but I'd ditch all of it, since it still sucks.

CAR_IS_MI > TurboSloth 01/16/2014 at 12:16

0

The SVO was the 4cyl.

You can get the GT or LX with the 5.0

roflcopter > TurboSloth 01/16/2014 at 12:16

0

The LX typically has the 4cyl in it, it's a 2.3L unit, same as what came in lots of other Ford vehicles from that era, with a few changes here and there.

It's a good project car in my opinion because it's damn near impossible to break, if you're looking to work on your own stuff and learn a lot along the way, it is fairly straightforward of a vehicle and there's very few things that you can do wrong to render it useless.

 > CalzoneGolem 01/16/2014 at 12:16

0

Tell that to the guys that are running 8 second quarter mile times on a stock short block.

RazoE > CAR_IS_MI 01/16/2014 at 12:19

1

SVO was the 4 cyl. Turbo. The NA 2.3 was just called a Mustang, if I recall.

mycarneverruns87 >  01/16/2014 at 12:19

0

1 pass wonders. Stock crank and rods are just not strong enough to hold that kind of abuse for that long. Stock short block is far fetched

briannutter1 > TurboSloth 01/16/2014 at 12:20

0

The GT only had the 5.0 and the lighter LX hatch and LX sedan could be ordered with the 5.0

I_AmDeath > Paul, Man of Mustangs 01/16/2014 at 12:21

0

Is it better suspension geometry? You really cant do much about geometry.

briannutter1 > TurboSloth 01/16/2014 at 12:22

0

The GT only came with the 5.0. The lighter LX hatchback and the cooler-even lighter sedan (trunk) body were often sold with the optional 5.0

 > mycarneverruns87 01/16/2014 at 12:22

0

Perhaps but SBF is the easiest and cheapest Ford motor to build. A few bolt ons will put a Fox into 12s.

CAR_IS_MI > RazoE 01/16/2014 at 12:22

0

True, but IIRC both versions of the 4 cyl were pretty rare (at least to find in running order now)

mycarneverruns87 > TurboSloth 01/16/2014 at 12:26

1

87-93 was either a 2.3 or 5.0. Gt like others have said are only 5.0 while the LX can have either the 2.3 or 5.0.

2.3 cars have weaker brakes, 7.5" rear end which is weak, smaller radiator, different fuel lines, 85mph speedo, and softer springs but don't throw those away if you like drag racing! :)

87 was the last year for t-tops and the only year a t-top was available on an aero car.

Some 1988 California cars had mass air while the rest got the upgrade in late 89 to 90. The mass air cars are easier to play with as the PCM responds well to simple mods.

GT trim had lower rocker moldings added on, different wing, rear and front bumper.

All years were available in LX coupe(lightest), LX hatch(t-top also), LX convertible, GT hatch, GT convertible, and GT t-top in 87 only.

Frank Grimes > TurboSloth 01/16/2014 at 12:27

0

Dont get a 2.3 auto like I did it sucks for mergin onto the freeway.

mycarneverruns87 >  01/16/2014 at 12:27

0

I know this, I have had a few. They are affordable and yes, with mods you can go 12s. 8s is a completely different story though. You are talking north of 800 HP at that point.

Frank Grimes > TurboSloth 01/16/2014 at 12:31

0

Depending on the year the fox could be had with a v8 or v6 or I4 but the later ones are 2.3 4cyl or 5.0 v8 only the GT could be had with a V8 only but if you wanted an LX you could get either I4 or V8 and both offered an auto or manual option. The SVO which is quite rare came with a 2.3 Turbo I4.

MontegoMan562 is a Capri RS Owner > RazoE 01/16/2014 at 12:33

0

2.3 was in the LX as well. I learned to drive stick on an LX 2.3L 4 cyl Notchback (my sister's first car)

MontegoMan562 is a Capri RS Owner > Frank Grimes 01/16/2014 at 12:33

0

So does the stick. OK maybe not merging on, but staying on. It needed a 5th gear on that 2.3L SOOOOOOO bad

Paul, Man of Mustangs > I_AmDeath 01/16/2014 at 12:38

2

I think more like shocks and spring rate. The SVO did have revised suspension geometry. Actually, quite a lot can be done about suspension geometry. Just need a new K-member up front. The rear, well, the upper control arms need to go and be replaced. They're too heavily angled to make for reliable handling. Watts link for lateral handling and a torque arm are best to replace it.

MontegoMan562 is a Capri RS Owner > TurboSloth 01/16/2014 at 12:38

0

So you could definitely get the 5.0 in either LX or GT. But you can also get a tiny 2.3L 4 cyl in a LX, which is what I learned to drive stick on lol (sister's first car, she was just happy it was a mustang).

There should be a v6 available in that range too.

I prefer the notchback look, but I'm big on obscure.

Give these a search if you want to be a little different-

Mercury Capri 5.0 V8, basically the Mercury version of a Foxbody Mustang:

Yeah, I know you're all shocked I suggested the Mercury variant :)

Grindintosecond > CAR_IS_MI 01/16/2014 at 12:43

0

regular 2.3 is very common. usually in LX used with a T9 tranny. most notchbacks have been snatched up for drag projects. the SN95 is a rebody fox really...just a tad heavier but probably just as cheap for a 6

CAR_IS_MI > Grindintosecond 01/16/2014 at 12:45

0

ehh, The only Fox Body I care about is the 93 Cobra.

jlmounce > TurboSloth 01/16/2014 at 12:49

0

Both the LX and GT come with the same V8. The GT had an appearance package on it as well as a slightly stiffer suspension.

The LX (especially if it's a notchback) is the more sought after car. The LX cars were designed as a no frills car with the powerful engine. As a result they are lighter and quicker than the GT cars. You do sacrifice power options and such though.

lonestranger > TurboSloth 01/16/2014 at 12:57

0

Im not sure if this helps or adds to the confusion at this point, but:

LX is the base model, and was available with a NA* 2.3L 4-cyl, 3.8L V6, and 5.0L V8 in fastback (hatch), notchback (trunk), and convertible.

'90 LX 5.0 fastback:

'93 LX 5.0 notchback:

GT is all for looks. Different front & rear fascias (bumper covers), side skirts, fake-louvered taillights, foglights, sometimes different wheels, early years could have two-tone and/or coloured side strips, you get the idea. It was only available with the V8, and only came in fastback and convertible bodies.

It all comes down to what you think looks better, and weight. Notchbacks are lighter (and I assume stiffer) than fastbacks. The GT's body kit obviously adds some weight.

* not to be confused with the turbo'ed 2.3L in the '84-'86 SVO.

Bob Loblaw Made Me Make a Phoney Phone Call to Edward Rooney > TurboSloth 01/16/2014 at 12:58

0

LX > GT. I can't stand the GT fascias.

overdrv > TurboSloth 01/16/2014 at 12:59

0

You could get a 5.0 in both and with the 5.0 in an LX it was faster than a GT 5.0 due to it having less options and being a little lighter.

mycarneverruns87 > lonestranger 01/16/2014 at 13:07

0

There is no v6 option in the 87-93 range FYI There was a v6 from 80-85 I believe as well as the 1994-2004 3.8 v6.

mycarneverruns87 > TurboSloth 01/16/2014 at 13:09

0

What kind of project are you looking for? What will you modify the car to do?

TurboSloth > mycarneverruns87 01/16/2014 at 13:20

0

beater, possible track/drift car.

mycarneverruns87 > TurboSloth 01/16/2014 at 13:28

0

Hmm, that would be fun. If it's just to be a beater than a raged out 2.3 hatch with multiple colors can be found on any craigslist near you.

lonestranger > mycarneverruns87 01/16/2014 at 13:28

0

Thanks, I stand corrected. P.S. Your reply is the most informative here.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

mycarneverruns87 > lonestranger 01/16/2014 at 13:34

0

I am full of useless random Mustang information. You could say I'm a Mustang Melvin

 > mycarneverruns87 01/16/2014 at 18:26

0

There are guys who've done it.

http://forums.corral.net/forums/5-0-5-8…

Gizmo - The Only Good Gremlin, but don't feed me after Midnight > CalzoneGolem 01/16/2014 at 18:35

0

Second step, remove transmission, throw a lit match on it. Guaranteed to keep burning as long as you own the car. Too bad it can't shift that long.

mycarneverruns87 >  01/16/2014 at 22:58

0

Well it looks legit, but this is definitely a super rare example. Like they said in the thread the tune must be VERY easy to not "shock" the bottom end. This definitely isn't something the average guy is going to do.

GabeCee13 > TurboSloth 01/17/2014 at 09:35

0

All GT trim package came with the 5.0. The LX, which is the cleaner body style without the "skirts" and wing had the 5.0 as an option.